TA6-02879

TA6-02879

Although the claimant's actions were correctly characterized as political (nexus established), the Board found on the balance of probabilities that Mexico provides adequate and accessible state protection, the claimant failed to rebut the presumption of protection or to take all reasonable steps to seek protection, and viable internal flight alternatives exist (Mexico City or Guadalajara); therefore the claim is rejected.

Citation
TA6-02879
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Canada (Minister)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Political Opinion Nexus, Burden of Proof, Country Conditions
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Political Opinion Nexus +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Canada (Minister)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether claimant's conduct/expressions attract protection under political opinion ground
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection is available in Mexico

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimant's actions were correctly characterized as political (nexus established), the Board found on the balance of probabilities that Mexico provides adequate and accessible state protection, the claimant failed to rebut the presumption of protection or to take all reasonable steps to seek protection, and viable internal flight alternatives exist (Mexico City or Guadalajara); therefore the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim denied by Refugee Protection Division, decision dated 26 June 2009